Question

Imagine a shopkeeper who is honest because being honest is good for business. When the shopkeeper refrains from cheating a customer, Kant would say this action

a. was wrong because its motive was impure.
b. was in accordance with duty, but not done from duty.
c. displayed a high level of moral worth.
d. shows that he was following the categorical imperative.

Answer 1

Kant would say the shopkeeper's action was in accordance with duty, but not done from duty, as it was motivated by self-interest for business success rather than by a sense of moral duty.

Step-by-step explanation:

The action of the shopkeeper who is honest for business reasons aligns with the idea of a hypothetical imperative in Immanuel Kant's ethical theory. Unlike the categorical imperative, which dictates actions are moral if they are done from a sense of duty, the hypothetical imperative is related to achieving a specific goal. In this case that goal is the success of the shopkeeper's business.

Therefore, Kant would say this action b. was in accordance with duty, but not done from duty. The action lacks moral worth because it was not motivated by duty, but rather by self-interest, even though the outcome (honest behavior) appears to be in line with what is considered morally correct.

Answer 2

d. shows that he was following the categorical imperative.

Step-by-step explanation:

Kant advocated that people should do their duty from a sense of duty or what is morally correct . But sometimes it is difficult to judge what is morally correct . In case of uncertainty , we should be guided by the principle

of " categorical imperative". Its meaning basically is that , we should judge by thinking , what if everybody acts the way , I am thinking to do. If I think , taking bribe is right , what if everybody takes bribe . The outcome will be disastrous . So bribe taking can not be morally correct. This is how

" categorical imperative" works